Land Cover Dynamics along the Urban–Rural Gradient of the Port-au-Prince Agglomeration (Republic of Haiti) from 1986 to 2021

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please refer to the attachment for details.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

It is explained in this attached document how your comments have been taken into account in the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you very much for the opportunity to read this paper. In general, I consider this to be correct text. The cognitive value is very much. I believe that articles from this part of the world are missing.
I am pointing out a few remarks that could improve this text.
1. The paper focuses primarily on national issues (Haiti). It is necessary in the introduction and in the conclusions to refer (compare) to the situation of countries in the region.
2. More needs to be written about Haiti's settlement system and the role of the capital in the country (including the issues of settlement functions).
3. There is hardly any discussion in the summary. It needs to be developed.
4. It is also important to emphasize the role of natural disasters in changing the relationship between the center (capital) and the periphery.
The article is worth publishing.

Author Response

Point 1 : The paper focuses primarily on national issues (Haiti). It is necessary in the introduction and in the conclusions to refer (compare) to the situation of countries in the region.

Reponse1 : We have included some comparisons between the country's situation and the countries of the region "lines 56-60, 77-80, 102". It should be noted that we have already compared the local situation to other areas in the region: Lines 367-370

Point 2: . More needs to be written about Haiti's settlement system and the role of the capital in the country (including the issues of settlement functions)

Response 2 : We have also emphasized the settlement system of Haiti and the role of the capital in the country" lines 81-87

Point 3: There is hardly any discussion in the summary. It needs to be developed.

Response 3: The discussion has been developed in the summary.

Point 4: It is also important to emphasize the role of natural disasters in changing the relationship between the center (capital) and the periphery.

Response 4: The role of natural disasters in changing the relationship between the center (capital), the periphery was emphasized "lines 86-91". This part enforces the sentences already evoked in the lines: 352-361

 

Reviewer 3 Report

General comments

The manuscript (MS) analyses the landscape transformation of the urban-periurban-rural gradient of the Port-au-Prince agglomeration in the Republic of Haiti due to the rapid demographic growth using satellite images from 1986 to 2021 coupled with geographic information systems and landscape ecology analysis tools.

There are numerous studies on land use change focusing on its dynamics and socio-environmental consequences. In that sense, this MS does not bring anything new to the table. However, I believe that although it is a simple work (the spatial analysis of the changes could have been somewhat more exhaustive, at least with confusion matrices or a table with the rates of land cover changes shown in the text or Annex) it is, at the same time, very illustrative of what has happened in the urban-peri-urban-rural gradient of the study area due to the chaotic urban sprawl and of the problems that it is causing and may cause if the trend of change found continues. I consider that its greatest contribution is to contribute rigorous and scientific information on changes in land use in a country hit by various natural disasters and plagued by serious socio-economic problems where very few studies are carried out.

In short, the MS is a simple, concise and clear article, of great thematic originality and useful for decision-making in effective territorial planning and management. In general, all the sections are well presented. The methodological part is explained in detail and is adequate. The quantitative analyses are very simple but sufficient. It might be advisable to incorporate in the main text or as an Annex, a Table with the different rates of land cover change (as it is now, it is sufficient information, but perhaps it would give more strength to the analysis). The results are interesting, correctly displayed and sufficiently discussed. I think the MS meets the requirements to be published in Land journal, after some small and punctual adjustments, and may be of interest to its readers.

Specific comments of the MS:

Please see some comments in the PDF document.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Point1: might be advisable to incorporate in the main text or as an Annex, a Table with the different rates of land cover change (as it is now, it is sufficient information, but perhaps it would give more strength to the analysis). 

Response 1: The table with the rates of land use changes has been incorporated into the main text "Table 4, line 282" . But this implies the deletion of Figure 3 to avoid repetition of data between the table and Figure 3.

Point 2 :Please see some comments in the PDF document.

Response 2 : The corrections have been integrated in lines 70-71 (This, despite that they perform valuable ecosystem service...), in table 5 (Zone status), in lines 354 (etc. has been removed). Point 4.1 has been removed at the request of a reviewer.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I think my comments and suggestions have been revised in the revised version, and there are no other comments/suggestions.